Why only 1 year.Could it be that for 2007 Navy could join or align with the BE.???Was Navy waiting till the BE said nO TO A SPLIT.?????

Navy is not joining the BE. If they were then Navy, ND, Notre Dames Trained Goose, and the BE would have made an announcement for the BE TV contracts. Navy just submarined and torpedoed the BE by taking one of its bowls from them if they are higher in the standings than the BE #3. Train goose sleeping at the helm again. The ninth team for the BE is coming from another conference - probably CUSA - that is why the Pitt AD alludded to the late year announcement. It avoids an additional lame duck status year for one of ECU, UCF, or Memphis.

Rutgers will back any CUSA team that will give them a ninth team to schedule will to avoid MAC jerks like Buffalo. Also the only attendent you get your information from is the toothless bathroom attendent who plays your theme song from Deliverence while you BAAAAA in your stall TS2.

The schools you mention in cusa are not in favor by the Rutger's Administration.Your statements about bathroom attendants at Rutgers games points out your CRAPPY KNOWLEDGE of Rutgers.The quackery surrounding these programs is not what Rutgers is about.

All this shows me, once you get past the team du jour in the Big East in a given year, the rest aren't regarded any better than, well, C-USA.

TS2 seems to be the kind of guy who gets all tickled and hopeful when a cheerleader punches him in the face. "She TOUCHED me!" You call that an alliance?

Actually, I'm having second thoughts. It's getting so ridiculous that I'm tempted to believe TS2 is a closet ACC fan doing a pretty good job of mimicking a hapless Big East fan. I can't imagine another explanation for being so devoted to every thought that eminates from Mike Tranghese.

Last edited by pounder on Wed May 31, 2006 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Scenario: TCU (former Big East football league), Utah (Pac 10), and Brigham Young (Big 12) have all left for BCS AQ conferences leaving the Mountain West with the following six schools:

WyomingColorado StateAir ForceNew MexicoUNLVSan Diego State

The conference can maintain its automatic bid in basketball by inviting any two core Division I members (member of Division I for eight years), and would need two FBS members to maintain its status as an FBS league.

Merging with (or simply destroying) the WAC is an option, but it makes finding suitable bowl game and out-of-conference scheduling opportunities within the footprint difficult to find. There's also that 16-team WAC that didn't exactly work . . .

Raiding Conference USA is an option, but will any schools accept an invitation? UTEP enjoys having in-state rivals "back east". Houston and SMU may not be thrilled with the prospect of all the trips to the Mountain Time Zone, much less the Pacific Time Zone.

Why not Army and Navy? They both already play Air Force in football every year and deliberately schedule games all across the country; effectively each school is giving up only five games by playing a conference schedule. Bringing the service academies on board will help maintain the conference's bowl offerings. Each school can deliver TV audiences nationally.

Adding Army and Navy also keeps from killing off the WAC, which would allow the WAC to do the dirty work of moving schools from FCS and allow the Mountain West to add regional FBS members at a more appropriate pace. As a result of the move, the Patriot League would likely be a casualty in all but a few sports (Lacrosse, Rowing, Field Hockey, FCS football) unless if they can find at least two core Division I members.

For basketball and volleyball, each MWC school would get one swing to the East Coast each season, and Army and Navy would make three western road trips (6 games). Swimming, soccer and tennis each involve only a single round-robin, which cuts down on the cross-country road trips. Travel for baseball and softball might be a little worse due to a number of the games played. For Cross Country and Track and Field, meets could be structured to minimize travel since there typically aren't many head-to-head dual meets.

My thoughts? Don't see it as being realistic. Army was already in CUSA, at a time when Louisville, USF and Cincy were still in it. You can argue that CUSA then was much better then the MWC you propose. Navy also turned down that same CUSA conference. Army and Navy could have joined the Big East but have rejected the idea...even the proposed half game schedule (both join BE as 9th team to play a total of combined 8 BE games)

And if you're the MWC and you could just bring in Boise St., Nevada and Houston as replacements, I just think that it would be a better fit as a conference. Add to the fact that if Army and Navy are passing on conferences closer to them like CUSA and BE, then why join one so far away?

Quinn,Has Army and/or Navy ever been offered full membership in the BE for fb? I know about the 4/4 scheduling scheme proposed by the BE previously, but not sure either was ever extended an invitation for full participation in fb.

Much has been said about Army's poor tenure in C-USA. My thought on that, is that Army during the period, would have been struggling with whomever they played beyond, at the time, Div. 1-AA level. Would MAC participation then been a whole lot better for Army?

Since Army and Navy appear not to have serious problems scheduling most of whom they want in fb, the BE 4/4 offer suggests it would benefit the BE scheduling concerns rather than provide strong incentives for Army and Navy. I don't know what kind of TV and related bowl deals were presented in the 4/4 offer, but it wasn't enough to influence Army and Navy to bite.

Would Army and/or Navy be good candidates for the MAC? With Temple in the conference for fb and resides between them, the MAC may make some sense. If the MAC wanted to go to 14 or 16 in fb, Army and Navy would seem logical to consider.

As far as I know, Navy had been 'unofficially' offered full membership before. I firmly believe that had the BE reformed with BC rather than USF, that the 4/4 split Army/Navy games would have been much more likely. Of course, we'll never know for sure.

I'm not really sure why either Army or Navy would want to join a conference. They have all of their home game on TV (CBS college sports). They have the freedom to schedule who they want. Also, individual bowls are more than willing to cut them deals or invite them if they are 'free agents'.

I'm not really sure why either Army or Navy would want to join a conference. They have all of their home game on TV (CBS college sports). They have the freedom to schedule who they want. Also, individual bowls are more than willing to cut them deals or invite them if they are 'free agents'.

This one is tricky unless the whole CAA moves up i see them rejoining CUSA

Maybe if Army and Navy were to join the CAA then the conference could move up to I-A.

Yes, but why would they even want to be in the CAA? Why not be in the Big East where they have an invite? We all have a tendency to want to push Army/Navy into convenient spots like as part of an FCS upgrade. But the Big East is better than any future new conference in the region will ever be in my lifetime. If they want in a conference, they'll take the Big East option.

But really, I think football has gotten to the point at both schools where unlike Notre Dame and the rest of the BCS, for these schools the sport means something different. They don't go into the season expecting to be national champs. but they have 11 games a year for the cadets and former cadets, with 6 games on the road. It's a special and unique situation for these programs now as they participate at the same level as FBS programs, but don't have the same competitive goals. It's quite honorable.

Third, I doubt very seriously if Army and Navy would want to join the Big East. I think they will stay independent. Army was in Conference USA for 6 years (1998-2004) and got out. I don't think they won more than 3 games during their time there. Joining the Big East is another step up from Conference USA. If Army or Navy were to join a conference, they should join the MAC. The MAC helped Temple revive it's program which floundered in the Big East. Also, Army and Navy's annual athletic budget is similar to the MAC members budgets approximately $25 million. Big East athletic programs budgets are double that and some close to triple. Other than geographically, I don't think it's a good fit. Yes, they would win here and there, but overall, they are handicapped and would have a hard time competing in the Big East on a consistant basis.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum